More on climate change and agriculture...

As a well timed but unintentional follow up to my last post about climate change and agriculture, the U.S. Climate Change Science Program (CCSP) recently released "Synthesis and Assessment Product 4.3 : The Effects of Climate Change on Agriculture, Land Resources, Water Resources, and Biodiversity in the United States."

This report has profound implications for the Three Rivers RC&D region. As a region heavily dependant on agriculture, we would be wise not to ignore the changes that are already happening to the natural systems that support so much of our local economy. Global climate change is no longer an abstract academic debate, it has moved into the real world with real consequences.

“The report finds that climate change is already affecting U.S. water resources, agriculture, land resources, and biodiversity, and will continue to do so.” The news release from the USDA cites several specific findings pertinent to agriculture in the Three Rivers RC&D area:

• Grain and oilseed crops will mature more rapidly, but increasing temperatures will increase the risk of crop failures, particularly if precipitation decreases or becomes more variable.


• Higher temperatures will negatively affect livestock. Warmer winters will reduce mortality but this will be more than offset by greater mortality in hotter summers. Hotter temperatures will also result in reduced productivity of livestock and dairy animals.


• Much of the United States has experienced higher precipitation and streamflow, with decreased drought severity and duration, over the 20th century. The West and Southwest, however, are notable exceptions, and increased drought conditions have occurred in these regions.


• Weeds grow more rapidly under elevated atmospheric CO2. Under projections reported in the assessment, weeds migrate northward and are less sensitive to herbicide applications.
  Horticultural crops (such as tomato, onion, and fruit) are more sensitive to climate change than grains and oilseed crops.


• Young forests on fertile soils will achieve higher productivity from elevated atmospheric CO2 concentrations. Nitrogen deposition and warmer temperatures will increase productivity in other types of forests where water is available.


• Invasion by exotic grass species into arid lands will result from climate change, causing an increased fire frequency. Rivers and riparian systems in arid lands will be negatively impacted.


• A continuation of the trend toward increased water use efficiency could help mitigate the impacts of climate change on water resources.


• The growing season has increased by 10 to 14 days over the last 19 years across the temperate latitudes. Species' distributions have also shifted.
  

“USDA agencies are responding to the risks of climate change. For example…The Natural Resources Conservation Service and Farm Services Agency are encouraging actions to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and increase carbon sequestration through conservation programs. USDA's Risk Management Agency has prepared tools to manage drought risks and is conducting an assessment of the risks of climate change on the crop insurance program. “

Global climate change and Minnesota agriculture

I was in Denver May 12-14 for Agriculture Research Service (ARS) Soil and Air Resource Management Air Quality and Global Change Research Customer/ Stakeholder Workshop. I had beeen invited by Dr. Abdullah Jaradat from the ARS research lab in Morris, MN. Dr. Jaradatalso happens to be a member of the Productive Conservation on Working Lands Technical Committee. The purpose of this workshop was to engage ARS stakeholders in the process of setting research priorities for the ARS in the coming five year period. ARS has identified global climate change as an urgent priority for research activities. Currently there is little conclusive data regarding the role of agriculture in greenhouse gas emissions, and there is a lack of knowledge on what effects climate change will have on agriculture. The focus of this workshop was placed on identifying specific topics that can be addressed by ARS in the next five years.

Attendees of this workshop included top ARS research scientists from across the country in addition to representatives from various Ag related businesses, industries, and farms. There were several scientists that were involved in the Nobel Prize winning International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). The IPCC was responsible for the report that Al Gore’s documentary, “An Inconvenient Truth” was based on. I was asked to contribute input to this meeting from the perspective of our work as a non-profit organization. Our work with PCWL, local food production, and sustainable agriculture offered a unique perspective in contrast to the other interests represented in the break-out sessions.

The Group discussion I participated in identified the following topics as research priorities:

Feeding the growing world population
Integrating Production knowledge with environmental impacts.
Effects of changing land use on Green House Gas (GHG) emissions, especially in respect to ethanol production.
Implications of bringing marginal land into production.
Biomass harvest and its effects on soil quality.
Life cycle analysis of GHG emissions for different cropping systems.
Best management practices for water use efficiency in agriculture.
Maximizing nutrient use efficiency in agriculture.
Better communication of ARS research results.
Multi-factor integration research - examine effects of multiple stressors on crop production.
Integration of current knowledge regarding global climate change and agriculture and analysis of variability of research results.
Extend and expand GRACEnet.
More emphasis on social and economic feasibility of management practices.

Key points I brought to the discussion from the perspective of Three Rivers RC&D included these research topics and issues:

Sustainable biofuel production – this includes examining effects of biomass harvest on soil carbon content, sustainable biomass harvest rates, and examining effects of crop residue removal on soil carbon content.
Nutrient Management – continuing to expand research on increasing efficiency of nutrient application, use of productive conservation crops to mitigate excess nutrients.
Landscape scale water management practices.
Practices for reducing Ag inputs for environmental and economic benefit.
Diversifying crop rotations.
Local and organic food production – this includes examining production practices, training new farmers and market development.

I also stressed the point that regardless of what practices their research show to have environmental benefits, if the practices are not economical, they will not be adopted on a scale that will offer significant benefit to reducing the effects of global climate change. Private landowners will play an essential role in the implementation of land use practices that will reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and sequester atmospheric carbon in the soil.

This focus of research on the role agriculture plays on global climate change and what effects climate change will have on agriculture presents a golden opportunity for agriculture in Minnesota. There already is significant research being conducted in Minnesota in the area of sustainable biofuel production. We are uniquely poised to take advantage of out excellent university research system, Ag industry, and abundant natural resources. We can research and implement solutions to the problems presented to our natural ecosystems while generating positive economic activity.

Spring?

With bits of green grass poking through the stubble form last year’s residue spring is finally here. The paperwork for our field demonstration and market development studies has been finalized, and our participants are chomping at the bit to get going. I have also received word that several of our native grass establishments have been planted. As soon as they germinate I will be going to inspect them and will post some pictures here.

The Gristmill has posted an interesting article regarding what we consider a farmer. In many areas in the U.S. being a “farmer” requires somewhere around 1000 acres, a million dollars in green tractors, and possibly several thousand hogs or cows. It is good to notice that this is not always the case, or even common in all parts of the world. This has only been the standard for a few brief decades here in the North America. Few can argue that our agriculture systems have evolved to be largely dependant on relatively cheap energy prices. As energy prices continue to rise and the concept of peak oil seems to be becoming a reality, we have to question the status quo in agriculture. Will industrial agriculture disappear as a result of rising energy costs? Not likely. However, agriculture will most definitely look different in 20 years. Will increasing input costs drive farmers to ever increasing sizes to take advantage of economies of scale or will the pendulum swing in the opposite direction with smaller farms producing more high value food for human consumption food? This will likely be determined by a combination of factors, some of which will be technological advances, federal ag policy and the level of interest in the new generations of farmers. Since we all know change is the only constant, I will leave predictions and prognostications to the palm readers, but I know which team I am cheering for…

So much for the Minnesota River...

American Rivers has issued a report listing the Minnesota River as the 5th most endangered river in the nation. As the report states this is primarily due to the proposed Big Stone II (yes, there is already a Big Stone I plant in operation) coal fired power plant, which will be built on Big Stone Lake, the headwaters of the Minnesota River. The primary problems with locating this power plant here is the copious water consumption and increased mercury deposition in the Minnesota River valley. Not to mention the fact that “clean coal” is nothing more than a myth, much like the Tooth Fairy and the Easter Bunny (sorry kids). This issue is compounded because the Big Stone II plant will be located on the South Dakota side of the Minnesota-South Dakota boarder.

From the mining process to the burning in power plants, the environmental decimation that follows in the wake of the coal industry will be remembered as a blight left on future generations. With fish Minnesota consumption advisories covering most bodies of water in the state with sufficient testing, it is hardly prudent to increase the deposition of mercury in the Minnesota River Basin. With the substantial increase in water withdrawal from the headwaters of the Minnesota River, current impairments to water quality in the Minnesota River will be amplified.

Our Federal and State Government has spent millions of dollars working to improve water quality in the Minnesota River Basin, and much of those gains will be wiped out by an ill-advised scheme as this. The press and the Minnesota state government have also been shamefully silent on this issue. Apparently the citizens of the Minnesota River Basin are providing the leadership our “leaders” seem to be neglecting. We should be thankful we have groups such as Friends of the Minnesota River Valley, CURE and Coalition for a Clean Minnesota River to work in our best interest to stop this foolish endeavor. In a time when permits for new coal plants are being denied on environmental and economic grounds, why is this even being considered? Our leaders need to take a small political risk and stick their necks out for the well being of their constituents.

I really need to get some photos up here to liven things up a bit, but the weather hasn’t cooperated. The spring greening of our fields and forests has been postponed by our seemingly endless limbo between winter and spring. The dreary brown landscape is getting a little old for everyone here in Southern Minnesota. I suppose soon enough the weather will turn and we will be cursing the mosquitoes.

Earlier this month the Productive Conservation on Working Lands Technical Committee approved several new crop establishment projects. These projects will assist the establishment of 180 acres of native grasses and flowers in central Minnesota. These Productive Conservation crops will be used for biomass and seed production. The seeds from these crops will be harvested and used in native prairie restorations across Minnesota. PCWL cooperators Minnesota Native Landscapes has been very helpful in locating land to plant many of these productive conservation crops. We look forward to seeing their plots of native wild flowers once they are growing this summer. We will be sure to post pictures.

For those who feel like they have missed out, PCWL still has funds for another 580 acres of perennial conservation crops! If you are a Minnesota Landowner or farmer and have been thinking about how to make some income on under utilized land, PCWL may be a good match for you. Previously funded projects have included: native berries, hazelnuts, native grasses for seed and biomass, as well as hybrid poplar and willows for biomass. For more information or assistance with the application, please contact us.

The American Farmland Trust, Ag Subsidies, and Ecosystem Services

In a recent American Farmland Trust newsletter they report Washington State passed an AFT supported bill - “Promoting farm and forest land preservation and restoration through conservation markets”. According to AFT, this bill will result in new ecosystem services markets for farm and forest landowners while also potentially improving the performance of existing environmental mitigation and restoration programs.

This bill should serve as a model for other states to implement similar programs. Here in Minnesota, we are lucky to have programs such as Productive Conservation on Working Lands, which is working in parallel to what this new law in Washington proposes to address. Economic viability has long been the weak link in the conservation programs chain. The bottom line is we need to make conservation competitive with commodity crops in the most environmentally sensitive areas. While PCWL is being implemented on a relative small scale statewide in Minnesota, it is attempting to address the three legged stool that is this problem. Without coordinated development of market development, product supply, and agronomic knowledge productive conservation crops will not be competitive with row crops on marginal lands.

For decades we have subsidized the agricultural practices that have resulted in excessive nutrient and sediment loads in our nation’s rivers and streams. To expect farmers to bear the full cost of mitigating these problems is unrealistic. The hyper industrialization of agriculture did not evolve in a market devoid of influence outside of supply and demand. Our federal farm policy has played a profound role in the shaping of domestic and international commodity markets. As unfortunate as it is, we paid to cause the problem, now we need to pay to solve the problem.

Recycling your house?

At home, my wife and I are in the process of replacing our current 160 year old farm house. Before the historic preservationists start beating down my door, take note the difference between historic and simply old. This house has a bad foundation, drafty windows, limited functional plumbing, and horribly obsolete wiring. It has served my family well for the past 5 generations, but it’s time has passed.

A friend of mine called me up one afternoon in September of last year, noting he had heard through the grape vine of a house that may be available soon. Being on a limited budget we jumped at the opportunity and made arrangements to see the house. Well long story short, we settled on the house and lined up the contractors, and we will soon have a 2 story house coming down our driveway.

I see this as the ultimate in resource conservation. The house we will be moving was built around the early 1900s, and is in great structural shape. Homes of this vintage are made of materials unavailable to the building market today. The framing lumber is largely well cured old growth lumber, and has been well maintained through the years. In my opinion it would be a shame to landfill or burn such a rare resource. With our replacement house secured, the next question became - What to do with the old house?

In our county zoning regulations allow for only one home per 20 acre parcel, so we have to remove the old house within one year of bringing in the replacement. With a bit of web searching I came across The Green Institute. After a week of phone and email tag I finally made contact with a representative from their “Deconstruction Service”. He described their services, and it sounded like a good fit for what we had in mind. The general idea being that we donate the building materials in our old house to them and in return we receive a tax deduction for the value of the lumber and building supplies they are able to salvage. They then sell that lumber to cover their expenses for the deconstruction service. There are a few more details, but that is the general process.

I know there are many old vacant barns and farm houses in the Three Rivers RC&D area collapsing from neglect. I would like to encourage any property owners in a similar situation to consider using any one of the building savage companies in Minnesota. It seems in many cases this is a good option to eliminate demolition costs while saving massive quantities of building material from the land fill. Check back later as I’ll be posting updates here and here as the process of house recycling unfolds…

It’s been a busy but exciting week here at Three Rivers RC&D. After returning from the North Central RC&D conference in Rochester, MN I immediately got back to preparing a proposal for the Farmers Market Promotion Program. If we receive funding, this project will develop a variety of educational programs that will benefit Farmer’s Markets through out the Three Rivers RC&D area. There will also be a component aimed at recruiting and developing new farmers for the area markets.
Three Rivers RC&D is very interested in developing programs and educating the public about the environmental and economic benefits of Local Foods and Sustainable Agriculture. We will also be involved with the development of the Friends of the Mankato Farmer’s Market organization, which we hope will be a valuable asset to the Greater Mankato area local foods movement.

Recently we were notified that we have received $75,000 in funding from the Conservation Innovation Grant program for “The Three Rivers Economic Conservation Project”. This project will fund projects that demonstrate economically and environmentally compatible agriculture practices in the Three Rivers 9 county area, as well as conducting a consumer education campaign. This concept of using sustainable agriculture as a rural economic development tool is central to our current project Productive Conservation on Working Lands. Funding for this program is expected to be available in October of this year, so check back for more details…

The idea behind the economic conservation concept is that we should encourage and promote profitable practices that conserve our soil and water resources rather than simply paying farmers to take land out of production. With uncertain Federal support for conservation programs it is more important now than ever to make conservation a profitable agricultural practice.

The organization Greenhorns was recently brought to my attention by one of my local foods and sustainable ag co-conspirators Ryan Ihrke. This group is highlighting young farmers who are developing viable and vibrant businesses and organizations based on ecologically sound farming practices. The majority of farmers profiled are currently working in urban California, but they are looking for nominations across the nation for farmers that fit this profile. It is very encouraging to see my generation stepping up as the torch bearers for sustainable agriculture, a field commonly written off as sovereign territory of multi-national agri-business.

Spring is on it’s way here in Minnesota, with the temperatures finally reaching into the 50s. This winter has been full of planning and scheming, and hopefully we will see the fruits of our work ripen during this growing season. We expect to see several hundred acres of perennial crops established this spring with the assistance of funds from PCWL, as well as developing a land management plan for the upcoming organic garden at the Putting Green in New Ulm.

Emerging Biomass Markets in Minnesota

I was in Fairmont, MN yesterday for a meeting hosted by Rural Advantage on the emerging biomass markets in Minnesota. This meeting was focused on technologies currently in use as well as emerging technologies. While some of the presentations were heavy on the chemistry behind the process, it was very interesting to get a good introduction to the process that converts biomass to transportation fuels.

Roger Ruan from the University of Minnesota Biorefining Center gave a presentation on the basic technology behind the gasification and pyrolysis technologies. Both have great potential for adding value to under utilized biomass. In addition, both processes produce by-products that can be used as fertilizer on the fields where the biomass was taken from. This closed loop model is especially important as prices for fertilizer have increased substantially in recent years. It also addresses some concerns about the sustainability of harvesting large amounts of biomass from areas that could be considered ecologically fragile.

Due to current and likely future economic conditions in agriculture, fields dedicated to biomass production are likely to be in areas unproductive for traditional row crop production. These areas may include, but not limited to highly erodible hillsides, low lying poorly drained areas, and areas with soils too thin to support the nutrient requirements of traditional agriculture. Sustainability guidelines for biomass production need to be established and adopted on a widespread basis in order to assure the continued productivity of our lands. We need to focus on developing this sector of agriculture in an sustainable manner from the beginning in order to avoid costly remediation in the future.

This potential for decentralized energy production in rural areas bodes well for the economic future of rural Minnesota. The difficulty of transporting bulky biomass long distances moves the economics of this type of energy production model toward smaller scale plants. Thinking of energy production on these terms requires a complete revision of our concept of energy production that has been dominant since the invention of the automobile.

A Lighter Shade of Green: Changing Views of Biofuels

Bio Fuels have been getting a bit of bad press as of late, in case you hadn't noticed. Recent research released from the Journal Science shows substantial carbon losses when lands are converted to biofuel production. These carbon losses are so large that the carbon savings from producing biofuels on these lands will take in some cases hundreds of years to make up the initial losses caused by clearing forests of tilling peat lands in order to plant biofuel crops.

While this is somewhat intuitive to anyone with a few ecology 101 credits, the obvious may be lost on the general public and policy makers. While these findings may come as an unwelcome criticism of the biofuel boom, an objective and critical analysis of this industry is essential. We need to develop a sustainable foundation now for the energy sector of coming decades.

Likewise it is foolish to paint the entire biofuel industry as being equal to corn ethanol and soy based biodiesel, as much of the media tends to. The biofuel industry in reality is a diverse mix of technologies and feedstocks. The sustainability of our future energy production depends on policy makers being able to see beyond the short term political gains they receive by blindly supporting some ill-conceived subsidies.

We need the ability to look beyond our own field borders to see what effects our actions(or inactions) are having on the rest of the world. We have for the most part been unprepared and unwilling to consider what effects the run up on commodity prices has had on food supplies, land costs and land use practices thousands of miles away. "Most prior studies have found that substituting biofuel for gasoline will reduce greenhouse gases because biofuel sequester carbon through the growth of the feedstock. These analyses have failed to count the carbon emissions that occur as farmers worldwide respond to higher prices and convert forest and grassland to new cropland to replace the grain (or cropland) diverted to biofuel. Using a worldwide agricultural model to estimate emissions from land use change, we found that corn-based ethanol, instead of producing a 20% savings, nearly doubles greenhouse emissions over 30 years and increases greenhouse gases for 167 years. Biofuels from switchgrass, if grown on U.S. corn lands, increase emissions by 50%. This result raises concerns about large biofuel mandates and highlights the value of using waste products. " (T. Searchinger et al.)

While this study will be scrutinized and disputed, the questions raised here are valid and need to be discussed. We need to know if the energy technologies we are investing millions of our tax dollars in are providing the benefits claimed. Regardless of which crop associations or political lobbyists are tied to a particular technology we need to objectively examine the application and support of these technologies.